Once and for all....

Not keen on Ronnie. Hate tennis.

Where do I fit?

Pink Ball wrote:

Holden Chinaski wrote:I say the mental aspect of snooker is what makes it hard, but actually the technical side is far from easy as well... Snooker is a much more harder game to play on a high level than tennis in my opinion. Tennis is easy. Snooker is damn hard. Federer's not fit to tie Ronnie's bow tie!

Holden, relax. Enjoy the Easter weekend. Bring your dog for a walk. Anything but reducing yourself to worrying about cockerel like this.

I am relaxed. My posts are not to be taken too serious.

SnookerFan wrote:Not keen on Ronnie. Hate tennis.

Where do I fit?

A round peg in a square hole

Dan-cat wrote:

SnookerFan wrote:Not keen on Ronnie. Hate tennis.

Where do I fit?

A round peg in a square hole

Kinky.

Federer has dominated tennis for much of the last 15 years, albeit Nadal and Djokovic have also had their periods of domination.

When exactly has O'Sullivan dominated snooker? I must have missed his decade of world snooker domination!

You can only compare Federer and O'Sullivan in terms of their respective talents, but talent is only one part of sport.

In summary; Federer has achieved significantly more in tennis than O'Sullivan has in snooker. And tennis is a far harder sport to dominate just because of the amount of countries that play tennis in comparison to snooker.

I am not detracting from O'Sullivan's numerous achievements in snooker but he has a way to go before you can talk about him in the same breath as Federer.

Pink Ball wrote:

Holden Chinaski wrote:I say the mental aspect of snooker is what makes it hard, but actually the technical side is far from easy as well... Snooker is a much more harder game to play on a high level than tennis in my opinion. Tennis is easy. Snooker is damn hard. Federer's not fit to tie Ronnie's bow tie!

Holden, relax. Enjoy the Easter weekend. Bring your dog for a walk. Anything but reducing yourself to worrying about cockerel like this.

Hey Pinkey - what do you think about the Jeremy Corbyn anti-semantic row?
Personally I think it is a huge over-reaction, possibly a smear.

vodkadiet wrote:Federer has dominated tennis for much of the last 15 years, albeit Nadal and Djokovic have also had their periods of domination.

When exactly has O'Sullivan dominated snooker? I must have missed his decade of world snooker domination!

You can only compare Federer and O'Sullivan in terms of their respective talents, but talent is only one part of sport.

In summary; Federer has achieved significantly more in tennis than O'Sullivan has in snooker. And tennis is a far harder sport to dominate just because of the amount of countries that play tennis in comparison to snooker.

I am not detracting from O'Sullivan's numerous achievements in snooker but he has a way to go before you can talk about him in the same breath as Federer.

Nice to read a neutral's opinion.

SnookerFan wrote:Not keen on Ronnie. Hate tennis.

Where do I fit?

In the middle of the pack basically

Federer = Ronnie

Raphael98 wrote:

SnookerFan wrote:Not keen on Ronnie. Hate tennis.

Where do I fit?

In the middle of the pack basically

POKER!

There will be very little sport in 30 years

Cliff Richard loves tennis.

Nuff said.

O'Sullivan career 1992 - earnings £9.7 million
Federer career 1998 - earnings $108 million

If Federer and O'Sullivan are same level I would ask the Equal Pay Commission to get involved. There is a huge discrepancy here. The lawyers will have a field day!

I am shocked that you are so money-oriented Vodka
Surely the number of titles is more relevant

vodkadiet wrote:O'Sullivan career 1992 - earnings £9.7 million
Federer career 1998 - earnings $108 million

If Federer and O'Sullivan are same level I would ask the Equal Pay Commission to get involved. There is a huge discrepancy here. The lawyers will have a field day!

Popularity =/= quality

Snooker is harder than tennis because in tennis, you can put top and side-spin on the ball but even the best players have not yet mastered screw.

When they do, the game will die as they will just serve with screw-back on the ball and it will hit the ground and bounce back to their side of the court.

All games will be stalemates.

vodkadiet wrote:O'Sullivan career 1992 - earnings £9.7 million
Federer career 1998 - earnings $108 million

If Federer and O'Sullivan are same level I would ask the Equal Pay Commission to get involved. There is a huge discrepancy here. The lawyers will have a field day!

Yeah because the money in snooker is the same as the money involved in tennis isn't it...

Federer never even made a 147.

Jahangir Khan didn't lose a squash match for nearly 6 years. And squash is much harder than snooker.

Jahangir Khan was infinitely better at squash than O'Sullivan has ever been at snooker

This is irrefutable.

Holden Chinaski wrote:Cliff Richard loves tennis.

Nuff said.

Exactly.

Vodka.

Snooker is far less international than tennis, and has struggled for sponsors. Of course Ronnie will have earned less.

By your logic Floyd Mayweather is a better sportsmen than both of them. So are most footballers.

SnookerFan wrote:Vodka.

Snooker is far less international than tennia, and has struggled for sponsors. Of course Ronnie will have earned less.

By your logic Floyd Mayweather is a better sportsmen than both of them. So are most footballers.

Neither footballers or boxers earn prize money though